The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 005) 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162 were read on this motion to/for SUMMARY JUDGMENT. DECISION ORDER ON MOTION In this insurance breach of contract action, Guideone Mutual Insurance Company (“Defendant”) moves, pursuant to CPLR 3212, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Metropolitan Community Methodist Church (“Plaintiff”) opposes the motion. After consideration of the parties’ contentions, as well as a review of the relevant statutes and caselaw, the motion is decided as follows. Plaintiff sustained property damage when a portion of its church ceiling collapsed. At the time of the collapse, Defendant insured the premises under a General Commercial Liability policy that covered property damage (Insurance Policy #1425-045, Doc 116). After the collapse, Plaintiff presented its claim to Defendant. Defendant declined coverage based on specific policy exclusions. Plaintiff then commenced this action, claiming that Defendant’s wrongful denial of the claim constituted a breach of contract (Doc 118). It is undisputed that Defendant moved for summary judgment two days after the court-ordered 45-day extension of time to file summary judgment motions had expired. In an amended affirmation in support of his motion, Defense counsel explains that, at some point, he “learned that the expert that [he] relied upon was no longer employed by the consulting firm that [his firm] retained and [he was], therefore, required to identify and retain a new expert on relatively short notice, to perform a ‘desk review’ and comment on Plaintiff’s new expert exchange in affidavit form” (Doc 139). “After numerous conversations and exchanges of copious documents with [the] newly acquired expert, his affidavit was prepared and sent to him for review and signature, but was unfortunately, delayed again, this time by ‘house counsel’ for the consulting firm…. [Unbeknownst to Defense counsel], house counsel was required to review all expert affidavits [which] required some re-working of verbiage in the affidavit, entailing yet further, unanticipated delay” (id.
